Cargando…

Non‐contact low‐frequency ultrasound therapy compared with UK standard of care for venous leg ulcers: a single‐centre, assessor‐blinded, randomised controlled trial

‘Hard‐to‐heal’ wounds are those which fail to heal with standard therapy in an orderly and timely manner and may warrant the use of advanced treatments such as non‐contact low‐frequency ultrasound (NLFU) therapy. This evaluator‐blinded, single‐site, randomised controlled trial, compared NLFU in addi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: White, Judith, Ivins, Nicola, Wilkes, Antony, Carolan‐Rees, Grace, Harding, Keith G
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7949520/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25619411
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12389
_version_ 1783663519359565824
author White, Judith
Ivins, Nicola
Wilkes, Antony
Carolan‐Rees, Grace
Harding, Keith G
author_facet White, Judith
Ivins, Nicola
Wilkes, Antony
Carolan‐Rees, Grace
Harding, Keith G
author_sort White, Judith
collection PubMed
description ‘Hard‐to‐heal’ wounds are those which fail to heal with standard therapy in an orderly and timely manner and may warrant the use of advanced treatments such as non‐contact low‐frequency ultrasound (NLFU) therapy. This evaluator‐blinded, single‐site, randomised controlled trial, compared NLFU in addition to UK standard of care [SOC: (NLFU + SOC)] three times a week, with SOC alone at least once a week. Patients with chronic venous leg ulcers were eligible to participate. All 36 randomised patients completed treatment (17 NLFU + SOC, 19 SOC), and baseline demographics were comparable between groups. NLFU + SOC patients showed a −47% (SD: 38%) change in wound area; SOC, −39% (38%) change; and difference, −7·4% [95% confidence intervals (CIs) −33·4–18·6; P = 0·565]. The median number of infections per patient was two in both arms of the study and change in quality of life (QoL) scores was not significant (P = 0·490). NLFU + SOC patients reported a substantial mean (SD) reduction in pain score of −14·4 (14·9) points, SOC patients' pain scores reduced by −5·3 (14·8); the difference was −9·1 (P = 0·078). Results demonstrated the importance of high‐quality wound care. Outcome measures favoured NLFU + SOC over SOC, but the differences were not statistically significant. A larger sample size and longer follow‐up may reveal NLFU‐related improvements not identified in this study.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7949520
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Blackwell Publishing Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79495202021-07-02 Non‐contact low‐frequency ultrasound therapy compared with UK standard of care for venous leg ulcers: a single‐centre, assessor‐blinded, randomised controlled trial White, Judith Ivins, Nicola Wilkes, Antony Carolan‐Rees, Grace Harding, Keith G Int Wound J Original Articles ‘Hard‐to‐heal’ wounds are those which fail to heal with standard therapy in an orderly and timely manner and may warrant the use of advanced treatments such as non‐contact low‐frequency ultrasound (NLFU) therapy. This evaluator‐blinded, single‐site, randomised controlled trial, compared NLFU in addition to UK standard of care [SOC: (NLFU + SOC)] three times a week, with SOC alone at least once a week. Patients with chronic venous leg ulcers were eligible to participate. All 36 randomised patients completed treatment (17 NLFU + SOC, 19 SOC), and baseline demographics were comparable between groups. NLFU + SOC patients showed a −47% (SD: 38%) change in wound area; SOC, −39% (38%) change; and difference, −7·4% [95% confidence intervals (CIs) −33·4–18·6; P = 0·565]. The median number of infections per patient was two in both arms of the study and change in quality of life (QoL) scores was not significant (P = 0·490). NLFU + SOC patients reported a substantial mean (SD) reduction in pain score of −14·4 (14·9) points, SOC patients' pain scores reduced by −5·3 (14·8); the difference was −9·1 (P = 0·078). Results demonstrated the importance of high‐quality wound care. Outcome measures favoured NLFU + SOC over SOC, but the differences were not statistically significant. A larger sample size and longer follow‐up may reveal NLFU‐related improvements not identified in this study. Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2015-01-25 /pmc/articles/PMC7949520/ /pubmed/25619411 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12389 Text en © 2015 The Authors. International Wound Journal published by Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Original Articles
White, Judith
Ivins, Nicola
Wilkes, Antony
Carolan‐Rees, Grace
Harding, Keith G
Non‐contact low‐frequency ultrasound therapy compared with UK standard of care for venous leg ulcers: a single‐centre, assessor‐blinded, randomised controlled trial
title Non‐contact low‐frequency ultrasound therapy compared with UK standard of care for venous leg ulcers: a single‐centre, assessor‐blinded, randomised controlled trial
title_full Non‐contact low‐frequency ultrasound therapy compared with UK standard of care for venous leg ulcers: a single‐centre, assessor‐blinded, randomised controlled trial
title_fullStr Non‐contact low‐frequency ultrasound therapy compared with UK standard of care for venous leg ulcers: a single‐centre, assessor‐blinded, randomised controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Non‐contact low‐frequency ultrasound therapy compared with UK standard of care for venous leg ulcers: a single‐centre, assessor‐blinded, randomised controlled trial
title_short Non‐contact low‐frequency ultrasound therapy compared with UK standard of care for venous leg ulcers: a single‐centre, assessor‐blinded, randomised controlled trial
title_sort non‐contact low‐frequency ultrasound therapy compared with uk standard of care for venous leg ulcers: a single‐centre, assessor‐blinded, randomised controlled trial
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7949520/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25619411
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12389
work_keys_str_mv AT whitejudith noncontactlowfrequencyultrasoundtherapycomparedwithukstandardofcareforvenouslegulcersasinglecentreassessorblindedrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT ivinsnicola noncontactlowfrequencyultrasoundtherapycomparedwithukstandardofcareforvenouslegulcersasinglecentreassessorblindedrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT wilkesantony noncontactlowfrequencyultrasoundtherapycomparedwithukstandardofcareforvenouslegulcersasinglecentreassessorblindedrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT carolanreesgrace noncontactlowfrequencyultrasoundtherapycomparedwithukstandardofcareforvenouslegulcersasinglecentreassessorblindedrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT hardingkeithg noncontactlowfrequencyultrasoundtherapycomparedwithukstandardofcareforvenouslegulcersasinglecentreassessorblindedrandomisedcontrolledtrial